New!! The Archives have been cleaned up, fead links fixed, and printable versions restored! Also, don't miss the new comments on the front page!

Livin'
With The Sims:
theAntiELVIS explores the wild and wacky world that is Will Wright's The Sims,
asking the inevitable quesiton, "is The Sims the first step toward a virtual
life where everyone is Swedish?"

Percentages. Who, what, why,
where, and – dammit - when? As loonygames’ own top dog, loonyboi, puts
it, "isn't it flaky how Game X will get a 76% and Game Y will get
a 75%? What the heck's the difference? With loonygames I decided early
on to do no ratings, and screenshots only rarely. I want people to read
what I have to say, and make their own conclusions about the game."
While I’m on the subject, what’s with these "3.5 out of 5"
scores? Why pretend you’re using a five-point scale when you’re blatantly
using a ten-point one? Is this some sad attempt to create the impression
that your magazine reviews with greater accuracy than the opposition?
Scales like that are almost as annoying as those that use smiley faces,
or those totally cheesy temperature readings - because the game’s
just that hot!!! Sorry, I got all Gamefan for a moment.

Rich Wyckoff raises another
interesting problem with the typical magazine score: "If you look
at a year’s worth (or even a month's worth) of reviews from any American
magazine, one thing should become immediately obvious: reviewers are
highly reluctant to give below a 75% (or the equivalent) to any
game. In the magazines which use a 1-100 or 1-10 scale with decimals,
you will also note that there is a large gap below 75%, with the rest
of the ratings given usually 35% or less". Whether this is due
to bribery and corruption, or just reviewers ‘being nice’, it really
does render use of a percentage (or ten-point) scale pointless. A truly
average game should get a score of 50%, but I think any game given 50%
(instead of the current ‘average’ of around 75%) would sink without
trace given the influence of reviews in today’s market. That said, somebody
has to go out there and buy Deer Hunter III. If reviewers are just going
to group the vast majority of games together in the same 15 - 25% of
the score band, it really does seem a waste of time.

A number of interesting differences
can be found in the scoring philosophy of British and American games
magazines. Despite our comparatively small size, the UK has a huge number
of video game magazines. Although circulation figures probably don’t
begin to compare with the likes of US giants such as EGM, Gamefan and
PSM, the UK’s gaming populace manages to sustain a wide range of titles.
US magazines (which a large number of newsagents import) have an appalling
reputation over here for being simplistic pap, filled with puerile advents
and sloppy journalism. In the interests of fair comparison, I tried
to get hold of some of the US magazines I mention above (which I used
to read regularly when I was at US schools but haven’t read since for
a good few years), but only the March ‘99 issue of PSM was available.
I have to say, it was a lot better than I was expecting – certainly
better than many of the UK’s (frankly embarrassing) PlayStation-specific
magazines. An exclusive interview with the Silent Hill (my game
du jour) producer was my particular highlight (most of the UK magazines
seem to have been rehashing the same year-old interview). However, I
felt the text of the reviews was too short and uncritical, and relied
on the scores to carry the impression of the game over.

I do feel there is a tendency
for UK game reviews to be a bit more critical and honest in their appraisal
of a game - even the British, Official PlayStation Magazine has got
stuck into some of the real stinkers Sony have seen fit to release over
here. While previews in American tomes tend to focus on the exciting
new features a game promises, British magazines tend to focus in on
the negative aspects almost immediately. Case in point: every FIFA soccer
game preview, for the last two years, has contained a sarcastic dig
at EA’s seeming need to update the franchise every six months or so,
with very little in the way of real (and needed) improvements. Maybe
it’s a reflection of our (dour, sarcastic) national character? If you’re
visiting the UK, I highly recommend you pick up a few of our games magazines;
EDGE, Computer and Video Games, OPSM, N64 Magazine and Arcade should
provide you with a healthy spectrum of British games journalism.

I think I can comfortably
describe myself as a ‘hardcore’ gamer, for want of a better phrase.
I take this to indicate a number of things - not least the amount of
time and money that I dedicate to my favourite pastime, but also the
time I take to check out what’s new on the gaming scene. When I’m researching
an article, or looking for information on a new game, I like to visit
as many web sites as I can and lurk on the appropriate newsgroups before
coming to any conclusions. This ease-of-access to information makes
me an unusually well-informed consumer, to the extent that I tend to
know some months in advance the titles I’m likely to be buying. I can’t
remember the last time I walked into a games store and saw a title I
hadn’t already formed an opinion about through reports on the Internet
– and part of that mentality means I can’t understand people who hardly
know what they’re handing their fifty bucks over for when they buy a
game (and then moan because they’re disappointed)!

I understand, though, that
mine is not normal behavior. This is the behavior of a net addict (one
who gets antsy if he can’t get online for a few days). Most normal people
do not relish the opportunity to crawl the Internet looking for snippets
of information about the new Sony machine. Nor should they - I do not
choose to thoroughly research every movie that I go to see (although
A Night at the Roxbury came perilously close to changing all
that).

I think what I’m getting
at is that perhaps casual gamers really aren’t so interested in the
nitty-gritty of detailed review text and just want a general indication
of whether a particular game I worth playing or not. While we may be
a few years away from having a famous thumb-wielding, game reviewing
duo of our own, Aaron Loeb feels that such a development is inevitable.
"Five years from now, we'll have critics that everyone knows and
simple reviews that everyone reads. There will be personalities like
Siskel and Ebert, and people will be more interested in their thoughts…"
It certainly appears that gaming is heading for the true mass market.
With each new generation of hardware, the number and demographic of
games players seems to swell. With this new audience, a wider range
of approaches in covering the gaming scene will be both viable and valid.
The "hardcore" gamers can scour the web for 2000 word anal-retentive
reviews of lost gems, and the less obsessed will be happy playing the
chart favourites – just like any other popular media. In many ways,
this is just an extension of what is already happening.

I can certainly imagine myself
playing games for the remainder of my life – whether I’ll want to spend
anything like the time I do now trawling the net for information on
the latest thing is another question. Maybe when the wonderful freedom
of university life comes to an end this year, I’ll end up becoming a
casual gamer, too? Hey, FIFA 2000 looks pretty good…